A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Cessna forced down by the Feds



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old January 28th 05, 12:55 AM
Roger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 10:56:36 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
wrote:

wrote in message
roups.com...
I've read this was a 172P model (but not confirmed it). I'm still
trying to figure out how they got four adults into the plane with a
valid W&B.


You gotta be kidding:-)) Some one smuggling illegal aliens is going
to worry about a legal W&B?


It just depends on the adults. I have flown a C172 with all seats filled by
adults. As long as the adults aren't too heavy, it's just fine.

Why anyone would immediately assume that "adult" means "170 pounds" is
beyond me.


Basically because you almost have to hunt to find 4 adults who are
170# or under. The percent gets smaller every day. The FAA was
talking about raising the average to 200#.

I frequently see messages like yours, implying that it's
impossible to fly four adults in a C172, written by people without even


Not impossible, just difficult to find many times.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

enough imagination to consider a very realistic legal-four-adult scenario.

Pete


  #12  
Old January 28th 05, 01:12 AM
Blueskies
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote in message oups.com...
I've read this was a 172P model (but not confirmed it). I'm still
trying to figure out how they got four adults into the plane with a
valid W&B.



Are you guys sure it was forced down by the feds? It could have been helped down by a gravity hole...


  #13  
Old January 28th 05, 02:17 AM
C J Campbell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Roger" wrote in message
...

Basically because you almost have to hunt to find 4 adults who are
170# or under.


Well, they *are* Chinese, so they may be small, depending on where in China
they come from.


  #14  
Old January 28th 05, 02:25 AM
Peter Duniho
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Roger" wrote in message
...
Why anyone would immediately assume that "adult" means "170 pounds" is
beyond me.


Basically because you almost have to hunt to find 4 adults who are
170# or under. The percent gets smaller every day. The FAA was
talking about raising the average to 200#.


Yes, Americans are getting fatter. But some of us have friends who actually
manage to avoid making their diet consist primarily of McDonald's and frozen
dinners.

Especially for those of us that actually hang out with females, it's not
hard at all to find adults who weigh less than 170 pounds.

In any case, the point is that assuming that a C172 is overweight just
because four adults are aboard is dumb. That said, what's really dumb is
that we're talking about whether the airplane was overweight, rather than
the obscenity of a government that is willing to use deadly force when they
have not established the guilt of everyone (or anyone) being fired upon.

Pete


  #15  
Old January 28th 05, 02:40 AM
Mike W.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I've read this was a 172P model (but not confirmed it). I'm still
trying to figure out how they got four adults into the plane with a
valid W&B.



Are you guys sure it was forced down by the feds? It could have been

helped down by a gravity hole...


empty wt = 1470 mom = 57330
25 gal fuel = 150 mom = 6900
frt pass & pilot = 325 mom = 13650
rear pass = 290 mom = 21170
"luggage" = 120 mom = 11400
---------------------------------
totals = 2355 lbs 110450 lb/ins (C.G. @ 46.9)


Assuming that the passengers were a little on the small side, it could be
done.


  #16  
Old January 28th 05, 04:06 AM
George Patterson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Roger wrote:

Basically because you almost have to hunt to find 4 adults who are
170# or under.


Four *American* adults, yes. You have to hunt pretty hard to find four Chinese
adults who weigh that much. And C.J.'s post says that's the nationality of the
passengers.

George Patterson
He who marries for money earns every penny of it.
  #17  
Old January 28th 05, 04:17 AM
George Patterson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



"Mike W." wrote:

Anybody care to work up a theoretical w&b on this?


Ok. With 30 gallons of fuel, 310 pounds in the front seats, 240 pounds in the
back, and 120 in the luggage compartment, a 1980 Cessna 172 with a decent radio
stack is under max gross and within the envelope. Since most of the Chinese men
I've known weigh around 140 pounds and most of the women tilt the scales below
120, it's certainly doable.

Did the AP article say if they were all adults?

George Patterson
He who marries for money earns every penny of it.
  #18  
Old January 28th 05, 01:55 PM
Larry Dighera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 08:33:41 -0800, "C J Campbell"
wrote in
::

Apparently an immigrant smuggling operation. AP is reporting a Cessna was
forced down Tuesday morning near San Antonio with four Chinese nationals on
board. The plane, N98873, is supposedly owned by Afzal Hameed and Alyce S.
Taylor.


Are you able to provide a link to the AP article?


  #19  
Old January 28th 05, 03:25 PM
C J Campbell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 08:33:41 -0800, "C J Campbell"
wrote in
::

Apparently an immigrant smuggling operation. AP is reporting a Cessna was
forced down Tuesday morning near San Antonio with four Chinese nationals

on
board. The plane, N98873, is supposedly owned by Afzal Hameed and Alyce

S.
Taylor.


Are you able to provide a link to the AP article?


Every time I provide a link it starts a whole sub-thread about spyware. I
will look and see if I can find it again, though.

Okay, I did not find it, but I found this somewhat more sensationalized
version he

http://makeashorterlink.com/?P2412325A

The original AP article said that there was no link to terrorism, so this
article must have used different sources. Note that they had to backtrack a
little in a follow-up article. Of course, if you are really paranoid, maybe
the Department of Homeland Fear suppressed the terrorism link "in order to
avoid widespread panic." Who knows?

Ah, here is a more subdued AP link:

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/plane25.html


  #20  
Old January 28th 05, 03:46 PM
Larry Dighera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 07:25:39 -0800, "C J Campbell"
wrote in
::

Every time I provide a link it starts a whole sub-thread about spyware.


Consider the fact that copyright laws Fair Use policy permits the
inclusion of excerpts (as opposed to the complete article) of
copyrighted material. So it is appropriate to include some of the
salient portions of articles in such a post.


Okay, I did not find it, but I found this somewhat more sensationalized
version he

http://makeashorterlink.com/?P2412325A

The original AP article said that there was no link to terrorism, so this
article must have used different sources. Note that they had to backtrack a
little in a follow-up article. Of course, if you are really paranoid, maybe
the Department of Homeland Fear suppressed the terrorism link "in order to
avoid widespread panic." Who knows?

Ah, here is a more subdued AP link:

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/plane25.html


Thank you for the links.

About 4,000 illegal immigrants of various nationalities enter the US
through the southern border daily. The INS interdicts only about 20%
of them. Ranchers on the border are beginning to take matters into
their own hands. The Department of Homeland Security is another
pathetic joke on the citizenry of this noble nation perpetrated by the
baby Bush administration, IMNSHO.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
1/72 Cessna 300, 400 series scale models Ale Owning 3 October 22nd 13 03:40 PM
FORSALE: HARD TO FIND CESSNA PARTS! Enea Grande Aviation Marketplace 1 November 4th 03 12:57 AM
FORSALE: HARD TO FIND CESSNA PARTS! Enea Grande Owning 1 November 4th 03 12:57 AM
FORSALE: HARD TO FIND CESSNA PARTS! Enea Grande Piloting 1 November 4th 03 12:57 AM
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools RT Military Aviation 104 September 25th 03 03:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.